Banning Drive Thrus To Save Planet?
Posted Sunday, June 29, 2008 at 6:03:37 PM
Apparently we haven’t given it enough thought, says Eric Sundquist, a member of the Madison Planning Commission appointed by Mayor Dave Cieslewicz. Sundquist has proposed the plan in response to the opening of a new Starbucks, as well as the suggestions being thrown around about it including a drive thru coffee lane.
Apparently the time spent idling in the lane is another example of excessive carbon emissions — so why not ban it?
People over at the Whizbang give the typical response about the Nanny State etc. and they even invoke the big bad wolf on the other side of the Atlantic — EUROPE! I assume the conservatives are worried that the ban of drive thru coffee may be accompanied by a European-style rise in the quality of coffee as well, allowing Americans to forfeit the tablespoons of sweet and low that have for decades defined so many of our morning joes.
If for no better reason, the proposal might be worthless because of the lack of environmental implications. Don’t we use more gas starting up our engines again than idling for a couple minutes. Of course, if there is one chain I could confidently say would garner a half hour line, it’s probably Starbucks.
Posted by Jack Craver.
Anonymous (June 30, 2008 @ 11:49am):
For the last time, Sundquist did not say he wanted to "Ban" drive-thrus. He simply said that should be something to consider when approving the starbucks.
And as for the whole "Nanny State" thing, this is more pointless than overbearing. It's kind of like how people stop eating meat to save animals. They're still going to get killed and you've deprived yourself of a juicy red t-bone because of some moralistic shot in the dark.
I want to see statistics that show how much gas is wasted on drive-thrus before people make a big deal about this. Especially when I really highly doubt anyone is going to spend 30 minutes in line at ANY drive thru (Especially at a starbucks). Even the McDonald's on Taylor in Racine (which has some of the busiest traffic for a fast-food restaurant in the state) only reaches around 20 minutes on a bad day.
-Smathers
Jack Craver (July 1, 2008 @ 10:40am):
Haha, good point Smathers. From what I'd read I honestly thought it was a ban on future drive-thrus -- I should have clarified that. While it apparently is not, if its approval is blocked by the city council, the likely effect would be a "defacto ban."
As for time spent waiting, now that I think about it, you're definitely right. Obviously if you spend 30 minutes in line you expect more than a coffee -- you expect at least a cholestorol doused meal of sugar and sodium and maybe a post-meal coffee as well.
karl arman (July 9, 2008 @ 2:50pm):
I also would like to see some stats concerning drive-thrus. There is a Starbucks near my home and every morning the line goes out of parking lot into the street... at least 20 cars.. You don't see drive-thru's in Europe where gas is $10 or more a gallon. American's have always been the biggest waisters of energy.. The time has come to start paying.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
